Watching the world of east London politics

The plot in Labour to remove John Biggs as mayor

One of the reasons given for the disastrous move to a directly elected mayoral system of governance in Tower Hamlets in 2010 was it would end the inherent instability of the ‘leader and cabinet’ model.

The latter entailed the ruling party group, ie Labour councillors, voting each April for their leader. This led to endless faction fights that eventually resulted in the rise of Lutfur Rahman.

It turns out these were the halcyon days of Tower Hamlets politics. As I write, the party is again at war with itself in a tragic case of history repeating.

In most councils, I think I’m right in saying that what most people care about is the efficient running of frontline services: bins, schools, street lights, housing etc etc. In Tower Hamlets, the discussions among many politicos at least (but more widely as well) centre more on race and Islamophobia….and when will there be another Bengali mayor. Of course, these are then wrapped up as one.

So the smear tactics that eventually led to the ousting by a court of Lutfur Rahman are once again being deployed against Mayor John Biggs. On a Bengali TV political chat show tonight (‘Straight Dialogue’), the topics due for discussion were “police brutality, harassment, racism, hate crime, Islamophobia and any other issues of concern”.

Panel members due to appear included former Labour and Respect councillor Gulam Mortuza, ex-Labour councillor Abdal Ullah and, lo and behold, Shiraj Haque, who everyone knows as ‘Curry King’ and who used to boast he was Lutfur’s main financial backer until people started to realise that accolade actually resided with the taxpayer’s grants pot.

Mr Haque is a Labour member although for how long is another question. He is currently in league with former (Labour) council leader Helal Abbas and a number of others to “stand up for democracy” and ensure there is no stitch up over who is chosen as the party’s mayoral candidate in 2018.

One of the consequences of the Jeremy Corbyn and Momentum show at Westminster has been a significant increase in party membership in Tower Hamlets. [I am also told that influential activists have been busy buying up party memberships for people. One informed source told me this “has long been the custom in Tower Hamlets” so that you have people who can turn up to branch meetings and vote as puppets. Some convince themselves this is democracy in action but the reality is that it is fraud and if anyone has any information on this please do get in touch – confidentiality guaranteed.]

Possibly because the “wrong” kind of members may have joined (legitimately and otherwise), Labour has decided to very quickly settle the important issue of who will be its candidate for 2018.

A series of trigger ballots among all the borough party’s wards and affiliates has just got underway. The intention of the party leadership is to affirm there is no need for an open election process for the 2018 candidate and that the incumbent is automatically chosen, ie John Biggs.

It’s my understanding that John has genuinely impressed the Government appointed commissioners and senior officers who oversee and run the council. The council is regaining respect in Whitehall.

But for a great many people, and not just loons, this doesn’t really matter. For them, partly because of his character (dry and sometimes blunt), but more because he is not Bengali, it’s time for another Bengali mayor.

So they are seeing this decision to “impose” him as candidate for 2018 as an undemocratic stitch up. The rallying calls have gone out. These trigger ballots must be completed by November 16. Only those who were registered Labour members before April 16 are entitled to vote.

If he loses the trigger ballot (he has to win a majority of wards and affiliates), there will be new selection process. And that will mean new hats into the ring. What is probable if that happens is that John will not win.

Who those new hats may belong to is a fascinating question in itself. I am told Helal Abbas has not ruled himself out, although he also fancies himself to take over Jim Fitzpatrick’s seat in whatever becomes Poplar and Limehouse in 2020.

But the really wild card hat is Rabina Khan, who, with her husband Aminur Khan, yesterday quit the Tower Hamlets Independent Group. This was as I predicted last month when THING and Lutfur chose Ohid Ahmed as their 2018 candidate for mayor. I am told she was subjected to a certain degree of misogyny by some of her former group colleagues, which does not surprise me. So good on her.

So here’s the interesting scenario. Remember she is a former Labour councillor who defected to Lutfur in 2010. She and others would like to return. Senior local figures like Abbas have made it known that the party should be “reaching out” to her and others (to Ohid Ahmed, even), to draw a line and readmit them to the fold. Some regard this as breathtakingly cynical.

But I would not bet against it happening. And if she is readmitted, there is a very good chance that the woman who lost to Biggs in 2015 could defeat him in an internal selection process next year. Even if Biggs wins the Labour trigger ballot this month, she could take him on outside the Labour tent as an independent.

Oh, the machinations, eh… . Well, they’ve only just begun. Last night, the first of the affiliates to hold the trigger ballot, the Women’s Forum, descended into farce and acrimony — and resulted in an official complaint by Shiraj Haque to Labour’s general secretary Iain McNicol about the way it was conducted.

I have been sent a copy of that letter, which was copied to Jeremy Corbyn, Len McLuskey, Shami Chakrabarti, loads of others, and Christine Shawcroft. I’ve copied it below.

The facts are that 67 people signed in to vote, but somehow 80 ballots were cast (so the usual story, really). The organisers, Victoria Obaze and Catherine Overton, who are John Biggs supporters, say they had no choice but to declare the vote null and void. It is claimed by John’s opponents that the vote would have gone against him.

Over the next few days, there will be many more such ballots.

Oh, we also have the matter of the Whitechapel by election on December 1 after the demise of jailbird Shahed Ali who is serving time for housing tenancy fraud.

Labour is selecting its candidate tomorrow night. John I think favours ex-councillor Motin uz-Zaman, but Abbas, Khales Uddin and Shiraj Haque are said to be lobbying hard for Tarik Khan. (Update: Tarik denies this; at the shortlisting session on Wednesday night, Motin, Asma Islam (Wais’s wife) and Victoria Obaze were chosen: the full selection is Thursday night. This is also being viewed as a stitch up.)

Oddly, THING is not putting up a candidate. A certain Shafi Ahmed is believed to be standing on behalf of something called the ‘Residents’ Alliance’ and THING are standing aside for him. Any more details on Mr Ahmed gratefully received.

Here’s the letter sent by Shiraj Haque and friends to Labour’s general secretary. One person who was at the meeting has told me the letter is “bollocks”.

Dear Mr McNicol,

Affirmative ballot for the mayoral candidate in Tower Hamlets

We write to formally inform you on behalf of a number of distressed members the Tower Hamlets Labour Party whom have been victims of intimidation, bullying, harassment and blackmailing by members of John Biggs’ campaign team; some of whom are senior and leading figures of the local Labour Party including Jim Fitzpatrick MP.

These allegations include threats of being blocked on shortlists of future councillor selections in Tower Hamlets, being expelled from the Labour Party and threatening to refuse and withhold support for community events.

Additionally, there are also serious concern of data protection violation whereby members of John Biggs’ campaign team have been seen with membership data when approaching members for support and it is unclear how such data was obtained and with which permissions.

It is quite clear that Mr Biggs’ team are clearly lobbying support for the trigger in every ward in Tower Hamlets which of course they are entitled to do, however in the process there are clear violations of due process taking place. We shall be following up this letter with evidence and affidavits which shall be sent to you shortly.

As you will be aware the first trigger ballots of Tower Hamlets Labour Party was from the Women’s Forum organised trigger ballot this evening, 1 November 2016 at 7pm at St Margaret’s Hall.

There was a large turnout of members. Many have complained about a lack of organisation, transparency and being denied access to the hall, being asked for photographic ID is which was not communicated beforehand and a new requirement for these types of meetings. Many members did have identity cards in their possession in form of student photo card, driving licence and so on, but due to not presenting their Labour Party membership cards they were asked to stand to a side of the hall, treated like outsiders and entryists and made to suffer humiliation in front of other members.

Finally when members demanded the production of Labour Party rulebook evidence stating that the only acceptable identity cards has to be Labour Party membership cards, they were allowed entry. The vast majority of the members did not receive notice of the meeting to attend this women forum ballot in the first place disenfranchise many eligible to attend and vote.

Members attended the meeting after hearing this via word of mouth and as a result the attendance was high, demonstrating that this is a vote members want to participate in and be heard on.

Many will be relatively new to the Party therefore unaware of the process and some of them did not carry their Labour Party membership cards. Those that did receive notice were not informed in that notice that they needed to bring proof of identification. It has come to our attention that a member and organiser known as Catherine Overton arrived at least half hour after the closing of the door. She was allowed to canvass for Mayor Biggs, take part in the voting process and become a teller while other women who arrived at the same time were turned away. A clear example of discrimination. Members were individually counted numerous times and had to sit through three registration and verification processes before the release of the ballot papers which was done by two people running through the attendee list and yet again verifying each member present individually before issuing them a single ballot paper. The public announcement by Victoria Obaze which announced the opening of the meeting during which she categorically stated that she was delighted that at least 80 members had turned up for the meeting.

The members explains their frustration and intimidation that they had suffered from some of the women councillors during this process. They were strongly advised by some of these women councillors and the organisers to support the trigger ballot in favour of Mayor John Biggs. These members state that upon the first counting of the ballot papers most of the councillors and organisers gathered around the counting table and started gossiping. They then announced to re-count the ballot papers again, but did not explain the reasons. They finally re-counted these papers up to four times before declaring the ballot to be invalid and gave their reasoning as receiving 80 completed ballot papers when they had only 67 members registered and the “discrepancy” in numbers was too large. One councillor went as far as to say publically that perhaps the ballots were tampered with while unattended and extra ballots added to the pile sending a message to members that their presence was unwelcome or some way underhand.

It would follow that if at the start of the meeting Victoria announced the number in attendance having completed the registration was 80 members, you would expect that same number of votes to be cast as was the case. How was there suddenly a 30 vote discrepancy which allowed the vote to be nullified?

For a women’s meeting late on a cold night to have a high turnout is something to be celebrated and encouraged. The above examples show a lack of respect for the wider membership by officers and councillors and makes a mockery of the efforts many women made to attend the meeting despite work, childcare and other commitments. It is unacceptable to Labour Party values of fairness, democracy and transparency to treat members this way. The Tower Hamlets membership list is perhaps one of the most scrutinised in the country and having undergone rigorous due diligence in recent years has been confirmed as robust and on the whole accurate. To treat members this way is appalling.

It is with regret the members wish to know from you whether the process applied tonight by the organisers and some of the councillors was the process held under the Labour Party rulebook.

In addition, we seek the Labour Party to immediately suspend the trigger ballot process in Tower Hamlets with immediate effect pending an independent investigation into our concerns raised above in order to ensure a fair and just process is adhered to. In the absence of any action we shall seek legal advice on this matter.

The Women’s Forum meeting was a total mess. The problem started with the fact that there were so many women, some with and some without ID, all crowding into the hall to get out of the cold. Names had to be checked off against the list. The list was 20 sheets or more long and was not organised into wards, just the names in alphabetical order.

I don’t think anyone really anticipated that number of attendees and there was no process in place. Once I got to the front of the queue I was asked to help out, we were passing sheets around trying to find names instead of allocating each helper part of the alphabet, it was a shambles.

After the registration had gone so badly and knowing how important it was and seeing it was such a mess a few of us felt it would be better to abandon the meeting but others said no it would look bad if we abandoned now ( in hindsight it would have been a better decision if we had abandoned )

I went forward and addressed the meeting to say we needed to redo the registration as it was so flawed and incomplete. Then I stepped back as I wasn’t involved in organising and I’ve resigned as a party officer because of Corbyn. Unfortunately the 2nd registration was also badly organised.

Once the registration process was painfully completed it was time for speeches. Very few of the women who wanted to trigger the ballot against John made speeches,they did have a chance but didn’t come forward.

Most of the councillors and some other women, myself included, made speeches to try to stop the trigger ballot. We all have different reasons, I feel that this kind of division isn’t helpful and frankly there is no magical, wonderful candidate who will save us all who is waiting to take John’s place (Im just waiting to campaign to abolish the Mayoralty with the 2020 Referendum)

Where the complaint letter says:

“They were strongly advised by some of these women councillors and the organisers to support the trigger ballot in favour of Mayor John Biggs”

That is rubbish, it was normal political speeches as you would expect and we all felt passionately, there was nothing intimidating about the speeches, etc.

While the speeches were happening the ballot papers were allocated and it appeared to be done diligently. Then the vote. Then home (we hoped).

Cat made the announcement (she is the Forum Secretary). She explained that there were more ballots than people present and she had tried to ring Chris Weavers (Party Chair) to ask what to do but he didn’t answer and then she had to ask Ali from London Labour and was told that the vote couldn’t be counted with a discrepancy like that.

All in all the night was a total waste of time and annoying for all concerned.

It makes me quite depressed on many levels: how naive I was thinking the court case would give Tower Hamlets Labour party the chance of a new beginning, a clean start.

The clue is in the word naive Simone. You would need to spend twenty or thirty years in Tower Hamlets and learn Syhleti to understand what is going on. You were very brave and took a stand against Rahman and you will always be remembered with gratitude for that but things have moved on and it’s back to business as usual.

So there were 80 votes but ony 67 members. A difference of 13. So how many votes for and against Biggs? Because if there were more than 34 either way then the discrepency is academic. Did Cat not announce the numbers?

I don’t understand your comment that the ” smear tactics” used against Lutfur Rahman are being repeated here against Biggs. As I recall this blog quite rightly exposed Rahman as a crook and he was eventually removed and penalised by an electoral court. What, exactly, were the smears against Rahman?

What is happening here is a re-run of Respect when the far left thought the revolution was about to happen with the twelve all Bangladeshi Cllrs. When they no longer needed Respect they just all changed sides. Hilarious!

I don’t agree that Biggs has been any good. He should have immediately sacked Aman Dalvi yet that charlatan is still in place raking in a whacking great salary and there were any number of investigations that should have straight away been put in place. Biggs isn’t a strong character and is really a compromise while the real politics goes on.

The first thing the judge said in his ruling was that the original allegation against Lutfur, of infiltration by extremists, is totally without evidence. After Lutfur was kicked out he broke rules, in his aggression to be re-elected.

I don’t want to put words in Ted’s mouth, but my impression is that he regrets his blog being used in the original smear against Lutfur, which came from every councillor who was ambitious to replace him.

Having said that Ted has always been highly partisan in this business, even after realising the original truth.

Note from Ted: This comment was edited by me after I was contacted by Jenny Fisher of the ‘East End News’ who said she does not wish to engage in a discussion on this blog. She tells me the original comment contained a factual inaccuracy that damages her reputation.

She tells me Ken Livingstone has not financed London Bangla.

She has not been the editor of the London Bangla.

She says the London Bangla has not become East End News.

All the work she did for the London Bangla came after the October 2010 mayoral election.

Bollocks, as a party colleague of yours is wont to say, Dan. I think Mawrey was wrong on that aspect and were he have had a full examination and presentation of evidence on that point, he’d have come to a different conclusion. IFE have infiltrated.

“Plot to remove Biggs as Mayor” . Forgive me but reading this report appears it could be understood as “Plot to keep Biggs as Mayor”

The nature of politics in tower hamlets does not change. Candidates and elected councillors can change parties it would appear with the changing wind, being accepted by all the political parties as it suits them. All to gain another ounce of power and ultimately control by any means, with little if any apparent moral or political scruple shown in this from the individuals or political parties.

They also from your report are prepared to use any underhand tactic to achieve their own agendas in this being supported by the official party or from other outside influences/ individuals, both being dubious as to achieving a democratic result.

Unfortunately the nature of democracy is that if you win the vote you do indeed win in most cases. If the majority vote against a favoured candidate that’s the nature of politics, and there is no point moaning about this its “DEMOCRACY”

Should the voters or should I say residents of tower hamlets care if John is selected to run as Mayor again, this is the question.

John may have impressed Whitehall , its appointed commissioners and the councils senior officers, well that’s an endorsement worth having, is it? !!, But to most as you have stated “In most councils, I think I’m right in saying that what most people care about is the efficient running of frontline services: bins, schools, street lights, housing etc. etc.” what about provision of freely accessible services to all, housing, fair truly affordable rents, a fair and reasonable parking service, with the latter it could be described as the legalised theft service!

The latest idea as our council is thinking of imposing is to raise the cost of residents and all parking permits, charging on the basis of the cars engine size, type and ability to pollute, meaning a family diesel will be charged many £100s of pounds for a permit! The alternative for residents to access affordable permit levels is to buy more efficient or electric cars, really achievable to many residents in the borough on low incomes who with family and work needs require that family sized car essential.

Given the above indicators for performance Has Mayor Biggs impressed the residents and voters? An election will put this to the test not just a political parties selection process, no matter how flawed and corrupt it is, from both sides of the camp/ warring factions.

The Truth is none of the protagonists are arriving at the table with clean hands or honest intentions. Mayor Biggs first dictate when coming into the role of Mayor was to give all the labour group and other councillors special responsibility posts and thus payments, increasing their allowances greatly.
This strategy copied from next door LB Newham as Robin Whales tactic of choice to give unity and I say expect COMPLIANCE from the warring tribe.

I say bring on a truly independent Mayor and cabinet to run this council properly for ALL the people of the borough irrespective of colour, race, sexuality and religion.

It makes Labour seem totally disreputable especially as The Party is often misused for personal benefit rather than for genuinely improving the lives of the poor, homeless, disabled and other needy folk.

Labour in Action (or should that be in Confusion ?) leaves an unpleasant impression. So many selfish people, so much nastiness and so many clowns or morons – obviously Labour are trying to emulate the Tories & UKIP. Meanwhile the public’s true needs are ignored and neglected.

The introduction of free or very affordable adult education could transform semi-literate or even illiterate voting poodles into informed citizens capable of making sensible decisions and liberating themselves from Labour’s perpetual voting abuse and sleaze.

C.C. I thought that we had had free or very affordable adult education for a long time. What is happening as I pointed out above is that Bangladeshi village and family loyalties are more important than the formal political structures of the UK. The loony left found that out with the Respect fiasco and they are still trying to work out what happened.

It is a major problem. Morons / illiterates / semi-illiterates vote for Labour because of the interests of people controlling the gangs or cliques or community interest groups.

White Labour chiefs know, and have known for many years, what is going on but selfishly they ignore the conspicuous abuses because they personally benefit from it directly or indirectly.

Its a sewer of democratic abuses. White Labour and their white-painted non-whites keep ignoring the situation. That is the unpleasant reality of Labour today. None of the chiefs genuinely care about “democracy” and few care about the people at the bottom of our society.

Just like the Tories would flog-off their own grandmothers, Labour utterly depends on electoral abuses to get elected.

Adult education, especially about how councils ideally should function and how the the discredited English political system works (including honours for party donations and favours) would empower the voters to question their electoral candidates and demand real proper service.

Leaving the EU just makes everything worse. ClientEarth (I think they call themselves) won their legal battle for cleaner city air only because of existing EU law.

Labour has so many dodgy characters as members whose activities seem to defy the best interests of the not really political members of the public. Surely if Labour genuinely had high standards, most – if not all – the dodgy characters would be kicked-out. However Labour standards seem designed to protect and nurture the dodgy ones for some inexplicable Party benefit.

Look at the Tower Hamlets mess. Who would you vote for ??? Where are the new ideas, the new energy and the new desires to excel for the public’s benefit ? Biggs is controllable by National Labour thus he is not a person able to respond to local challenges and local issues without first thinking what will National Labour think. A political party poodle, whose election was run not by him but by The Party, is not really a man I would trust.

Caring, guts and a desire to become a public champion is sadly missing in the wake of the Rahman’s empire’s demise.

Shame you are in Spain otherwise you could stand as a candidate in 2018.

P.S.Bangladeshi village and family loyalties have been exploited by Labour for many years.

The difference today is Labour-trained people are doing the same as Labour always did, but are now directing the votes – just like Labour usually did – to people unfit to battle for the public’s benefit.

Who is proud to live in this electoral cesspit where democracy is a meaningless illusion ?

It’s curtains for Rabina Khan. She has reached out to other parties but they didn’t reach back. Labour won’t have her back. I doubt she will stand as a councillor again and her silly ego trip bid to stand as a Mayoral candidate will sink without trace.

Irish Coffee. Your understanding of the shenanighans of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael may be up to scratch but I am afraid you are sailing into uncharted waters in Tower Hamlets and the Bangladeshi community.

Dozy Dave Hill of The Guardian still doesn’t understand the process of how votes are ” bought” so I will explain and maybe he will now get some idea of what is happening.

The first thing to understand is that ” villages” are very important even though with forty years of capital investment funded by UK Bangladeshis they are now small cities. Young Bangladeshis born here who have never been to their family village still identify themselves as coming from Shiramishy, Habigange or wherever. From these places there is a hierarchy based on land ownership, political patronage and a very complicated and difficult to understand quasi aristocracy.

People who are politically well connected in Syhlet or who have businesses there carry that pull over to Tower Hamlets. Think early nineteenth century rural England of William Cobbett’s Rural Rides and not early twenty first century London and you will be approaching the real situation. The difference is what while Cobbett was fully aware of the corruption of his times and struggled against it, the Labour Party is still clueless as to what is going on and Dave Hill may as well be living on another planet. Actually he is, it’s called The Guardian!

At all times think in terms of blocks of votes under the control of political/business interests who can direct those votes to where they like after negotiations and trade offs. That is how Bangladesh is run, actually much of the world is, so why be different? The Bangladeshis involved in all of this aren’t, as CC seems to think, moronic or half educated, they are fully aware of what is going on.

There are other more recent factors to take into consideration that are particular to Asians in the UK and that is that as a younger generation of politically ambitious would be MPs and councillors began to emerge they found that the older generation, which had usually joined Labour, had no intention of moving over and relinquishing their salaries, for that is what the expenses amount to, as well as the ability to obtain finances for various community projects which can provide more expenses and jobs for supporters.

This group joined first of all the Lib Dems and after their demise looking for a home for their political ambitions Respect. The latter was never the left of Labour socialist project that the white left convinced itself it was. It was an amalgam of Muslims angry at the Iraq invasion and politically ambitious young men and women excluded from the spoils of the the UK system by an older generation who wouldn’t move over.

What Respect did do was to create a block of floating voters looking for a political home. When the Bangladeshis pulled the plug on Respect it went into the Labour Party to back Lutfur Rahman, then to his Tower Hamlets First party and now makes up THING. It may be fractured and full of splits but so is UKIP and they got four million votes at the last general election, double the Greens.

Although the THING group don’t have the traditional power bases I have described above they have tasted political power and know how it can generate access to a billion pound budget in Tower Hamlets. The leaders know that they can be a factor in deciding the outcomes of various things, no pun intended, and the horse trading has already begun.

I hope this has been of some use in trying to decipher what is happening but keep in mind that Byzantine and Florentine politics pale into insignificance compared to Tower Hamlets.

I hope my contributions have been of help. If any of the thumbs downers have any evidence to contradict me perhaps they would like to post it here. Ted seems pretty liberal in what is allowed, unlike Comment is Free at The Grauniad which most certainly isn’t.

Of course, this is just something that we do in the Labour Party. We have a democratic process to decide who our candidates are and for sitting MPs and Mayors that includes this ‘trigger ballot’ process. Unfortunately it opens us up for a lot of public scrutiny and opponents – either of the party or the sitting candidate – can make mischief at the same time.

I understand that the majority of branches and affiliates have now proposed that John Biggs remains as the Labour candidate for Mayor of Tower Hamlets in 2018 so this

Of course councillors don’t have a trigger ballot. They all automatically face reelection. If I’d spent the last few months unsuccessfully plotting to oust John and proving not just my disloyalty but also my renowned incompetence and inability to win anything , I think I’d do the decent thing and find a new hobby!

Lutfur learnt his vote-rigging skills in Tower Hamlets Labour Party. The voter fraud in the 2014 mayoral elections had its origins in Tower Hamlets Labour Party. It is now clear that not only was the mayoral election fraudulent but so were the local councillor elections held at the same time. Why was Sanu Miah hung out to dry by the local party leadership when he too was clealrly a victim of voter fraud? If the local Party leadership knew or strongly suspected that the 2014 local council elections were fraudulent, it acquiesced with that crime against democracy. I also believe that the 2010 mayoral election was fraudulent and also the local referendum for an elected mayor and even the petition that called for the local referendum for an elected mayor -that they were corruoted. In other words, the whole bloody lot!

After all that has happened, its astonishing that LP national and local leadership hasn’t got a grip on internal Labour Party voting fraud.

Im no longer a member having been honoured by expulsion after 38 years’ continuous membership ofvthe Labour Party. I make no complaint – I found it liberating. That doesnt mean I dont care about the Party. Its a paradox of the Left that it often overlooks fraud and criminality amongst some if its supporters. That is the seed of its own destruction as the end doesnt justify the means, it destroys it. No wonder Jeremy Corbyn cancelled his final campaign rally at the Waterlilly, which would have given off all the wrong signals nationally and locally. The question is who suggested it in the first place? The honest and principled Left must distance itself from the corrupt Left of carpetbaggers and gangsters who only use socialism as a smoke-screen.

Calling Corbyn principled is an oxymoron: a man who has presided over Labour becoming a hot bed of Anti Semites and misogynists is far from principled. Anyone who follows me on twitter will know this is my pet subject and to be honest I would rather have Lutfur Rahman as Labour leader than Jeremy Corbyn, any day of the week (he is far more principled! )

Recently Momentum are starting to raise their profile in Tower Hamlets: both at party meetings and in this Trigger Ballot process. Lutfur’s defender and fundraiser Christine Shawcroft was in attendance at the Women’s Forum event mentioned in the article.

I dont know why Corbyn cancelled his rally at the Waterlily but I do know that there is an unsavoury alliance forming between one of the Tower Hamlets Labour party groupings and Momentum. They think they can gain leverage from their support of Corbyn and use it as a way of influencing things, eg membership applications, choice of MPs and councillors, etc.

Debbie.
I respect what you have done but you are now being a bit vague. If you have things that can be investigated send them to the madmullahofbricklane@gmx.com and there is investigative help for you.

With a possible UK election looming, non-Labour voters not wishing to support the UKIP-like Tories (and definitely not UKIP) may be dissuaded from voting Labour because of the emergence of – in the public’s memory – a Militant Tendency replacement very active inside the heart of Labour.

Shame that with all the TH problems past and still present Labour are indifferent to the creeping Momentum take-over. This indifference or unwillingness to administer a proper and appealing political party locally will be replicated in England, probably Wales but never in Bonnie Scotland or Northern Ireland.

If Labour, the alleged party for the poor, the discriminated against and weak not forgetting pro-social justice, continue to ignore the malignant cancer – both in TH and elsewhere – it will ensure the Tories get elected with a greater (and therefore more dangerous) majority.

How on earth can the caring public vote Labour ?

Time for a new political party – The People’s Party® ?

Don’t forget folks TH is merely one in a growing cluster of misfit local government disasters. Gosh not much voting choice in the LB of TH !

“Of course councillors don’t have a trigger ballot. They all automatically face re-selection.”

Pay attention at the back. Notably to the rule changes passed by Labour Conference 2016.

At the briefing for London CLP & LCF Officers on Tuesday 1 November 2016, Deputy Regional Director Amy Fode surprised many. She explained that each sitting Councillor will have a separate trigger ballot during the shortlisting meeting before shortlisting takes place.

Doubtless this change will surprise many more. It was resented as an alternative to the present possibility of selecting the sitting Councillors en bloc, which is allowed by rarely used.

Thank you Debbie. I had already drawn people’s attention to the fact that she was back in Tower Hamlets but as far as I know no questions whether searching or otherwise have been asked. The loony left faction of which she is a member certainly won’t and neither will Biggs. He likes a quiet life.

It would be worth keeping an eye on entryism by former and current SWP and other LL members as they have certainly decided to infiltrate the Labour Party going to the extent of dissolving Respect an I think the Alliance for Workers Liberty. The implosion of the left after the collapse of Respect and the the split in the SWP with resignations and expulsions as well as the fall out from the Comrade Delta/Martin Smith rape affair has left a lot of Trotskyists with no political home but with all sorts of skills in the packing and manipulating of Labour branches. So beware and let’s keep ourselves informed.

Ted. With regards to your editing of my comments about Jenny Fisher and London Bangla perhaps you might ask her to comment on the following http://www.londonbangla.com/contact-us/ failing that any googling of the names Jenny Fisher and London Bangla will give some interesting results. If my link isn’t correct can someone out there improve? Thanks.

Quite correct CC. It is a plain as a pikestaff that this woman has never had anything whatsoever to do with the utterley dispicable gutter, muck raking rag London Bangla and any suggestion to the contrary is a slur on her otherwise good name as a journalist of the highest integrity upholding the standards of honesty and probity of which the Troyskyist press in this country is rightly proud.

Very soon people will be saying that Ken Livingstone, whose career was tragically cut short as such a young age was brought down by a financial scandal involving Lee Jasper who managed to disappear £3.5 million from the London Development Agency, was not a beacon of hope for the oppressed of London but a drunken anti semite and Hitler obsessive who financed anyone and anybody who would use the money to claim in their pages and on their websites that he was the only hope of staving off a fascist takeover of the capital. These current detractors of the saintly Livingstone are now attacking the blameless Jenny Fisher who has struggled tirelessly with her Trotskyist comrades to improve the living conditions of the downtrodden masses of East London regardless of of ethnic background and to lead them to victory by taking power in the name of the masses guided by the inevitably victorious Livingstone/Trotsky/Lee Jasper/Jerey Corbyn/Uncle Tom Cobley thought.

[That’s enough, Wetherspoons at Liverpool Street Staion is open at seven so piss off down there and stop driving everyone mad. Ruddles is £2 35 a pint]

I don’t understand all of this but the posts at the end are interesting. www,leftfutures.org/2012/07/the-labour-left-at-its-worst it does seem that Shawcroft and Fisher know each other. Also http://www.companycheck.co.uk/company/08211427/

The UK government has improved the privatised Companies House service (run by a contractor). The new web site is impressive and better but sometimes one still needs to consulthttp://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/info/

I suppose it is just possible for two directors of the same limited company LABOUR BRIEFING CO-OPERATIVE LTD not to have noticed each other at company board meetings, despite both being appointed to the board of directors on the same day 😉

Well truffled CC. What is now emerging is that Fisher was in charge of London Bangla when it ran the ad/article calling Abbas Uddin a wife beater and that she is in the same organisation as Shawcroft who was a close associate of Livingstone who of course defied the Labour Party and campaigned for Lufur Rahman against the said Abbas Uddin. Are we to see a Trotskyist/Islamist alliance here in the same way that there are Red/Brown Marxist/Nazi alliances in various European states against the supposed world wide Jewish conspiracy? With scum bags like these anything is possible.

Comments are closed.

Email Subscription

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.